I love it. Everyone that was on the Hick poll article yesterday claiming that polling was not valid and making wild claims about the polling data being inaccurate are now here today claiming that polling data is as good as gold.

Sal M O\'nella wrote:I love it. Everyone that was on the Hick poll article yesterday claiming that polling was not valid and making wild claims about the polling data being inaccurate are now here today claiming that polling data is as good as gold.

Good point, maybe this poll is skewed also. Maybe the reality is that Gardner is a slight favorite.

Maybe if Udall, like Obama turned out too, wasn't such a right-of-center D.I.N.O he would be able to fire up the Liberal base of the Democratic Party and get them to turn out -- but no, they would rather be corporatists and take "shellackings"

This will be an interesting race to watch if you are a Poli-Sports Fan. All Congressman Gardner had to do was say he is running and – BAM! – he is tied with the incumbent. Gardner is far better known in the conservative reaches of the state. Udall is – well, it is sort of, like, “Now who’s our other senator again?” The last news release I got from Udall, as I recall, was something about the crisis over not having enough shooting ranges on public lands. Now there is a meaty issue, huh? Oddly enough my least favorite senator, Thurston Howell Bennet, III, has done far more heavy lifting in Washington DC than the man concerned about public shooting ranges. Udall will be a slam dunk among the Democrats, Gardner among the Republicans. So it is the indies (the unaffiliated), who lead the state in “party registration, who will elect the next U.S. Senator from Colorado. The dirty laundry ad campaigns have already begun – Udall likes Obama (a crime in some Colorado counties) and Gardner is a Super Anti-Abortionist (reviled by a majority of women), so hold your noses and let the fight begin. Gardner is good on the ground, personable and comfortable on the hustings shaking hands. Udall is aloof; there is no other way to describe him. That comes off as elitist (I am aloof and many people thought I was a snob, which I am not; I am an elitist, however, when it comes to who should govern.). So we get to experience millions upon millions of dollars worth of very nasty TV campaign ads and printed flyers and it will be interesting to see whether they are effective at all; I suspect they will not be; I do not think either candidate has closet skeletons; we all know where they pretty much stand and who funds them. Nothing new there. In the end it will be boots on the ground – how many voters will get up off their lard-arses and exercise the democratic voting franchise for which so many of our brethren have sacrificed. Just sit back and enjoy the show. Remember, by the time the Gardner-Udall campaign is in full swing, so will the Broncos next NFL season.

Sans Flangi wrote:Can't we find someone better than Gardner or Udall? Both are more concerned about their respective party's national agenda than the state they represent. Once again the only "approved" choices are a pair of dunces, making it a "lesser of two evils" election.

The people best suited to the job won't run because they'll be chewed up by the meet grinder we call a competition. I certainly won't subject myself to reporters crawling up my butt in search of something dirty and stinky. Only those who crave power and fame will run.

Sal M O\'nella wrote:I love it. Everyone that was on the Hick poll article yesterday claiming that polling was not valid and making wild claims about the polling data being inaccurate are now here today claiming that polling data is as good as gold.

Lynn Bartels is a classic LIV'eral. She'll twist and spin anything to make it look good for LIV'erals!

I know you tea b@ggers have a hard time excepting science, but Bartels didn't spin anything yesterday, she simply reported the survey results. Results that you didn't like.

I don't like these results, but they are what they are and they show that Udall has some work to do.

ChillinDenver wrote:It is absolutely CRITICAL that liberals and moderates vote. The only thing that will guarantee a win for Gardner and the Tee Nuts is voter apathy.

Isn't that assuming that "moderates" are really liberals and vote that way?

By definition, they are not.

No, it is based on the fact that Gardner is an extremist. Or he use to be before he decided to run for a statewide position. Now he has started to change his positions to be more in line with more Coloradans.

ChillinDenver wrote:It is absolutely CRITICAL that liberals and moderates vote. The only thing that will guarantee a win for Gardner and the Tee Nuts is voter apathy.

Isn't that assuming that "moderates" are really liberals and vote that way?

By definition, they are not.

No, it is based on the fact that Gardner is an extremist. Or he use to be before he decided to run for a statewide position. Now he has started to change his positions to be more in line with more Coloradans.

Gardner is not anything near an extremist, he is nowhere near as far to the right as Udall is to the left.

Perhaps you should examine your own position on the right/left scale to understand why you consider him that way. After all, the Equator looks far to the north to someone in Australia, doesn't it?

"The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." (Barack Obama August 21, 2010)

Based on the history of the Quinnipiac polls, yesterday polls shows me Hick is in a dead heat with many of the contenders for governor and Gardner is ahead by 4-5 points. Typically if you take the Quinnipiac poll numbers and add 5 points to the side of the conservatives and you will have a more accurate picture of reality.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Oct 11 1798John Adams (Nation's 2nd President)

schneiderdick wrote:This will be an interesting race to watch if you are a Poli-Sports Fan. All Congressman Gardner had to do was say he is running and – BAM! – he is tied with the incumbent. Gardner is far better known in the conservative reaches of the state.

That's Gardner's problem. He's now moving from generic political opponent -- the "BAM! point" -- (viz-a-viz a known and unbeloved incumbent) to being an individual who has to stand on his own. 50% of Coloradans say they don't yet know much about Gardner. That 50% is weighted heavily, not toward Democrats (who are quite familiar with Gardner), but toward independents, and who -- as you note -- will be outside "conservative reaches of the state." For a candidate whose most dangerous flaw is his extremist voting record, that spells doom. (Seriously? Garnder is going to persuade middle of the road voters that opposition to hiking minimum wages, threatening to default of the public debt, wanting to abolish Medicare, total and complete dedication to striping medical coverage from hundreds of thousands of Coloradoans are facts in his favor??) Gardner sits AT his peak popularity and can only decline from this point. Udall, by comparison, is a known factor - public opinion about him can only wiggle at this point. (Whether it wiggles up or down is yet to be seen.)

NOTE: this poll also shows Hillary Clinton struggling against any GOP candidate in 2016 including Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee, and Chris Christie. Really? Does anyone outside the right-wing bubble believe that there is any likelihood < 90% that Clinton wouldn't carry Colorado even if narrowly against any of these fellows? (Huckabee!?! ROFL) Q does fairly good polling but Colorado (despite their claim to the contrary) isn't their specialty.

Udall is – well, it is sort of, like, “Now who’s our other senator again?” The last news release I got from Udall, as I recall, was something about the crisis over not having enough shooting ranges on public lands. Now there is a meaty issue, huh?

Ironically, most of Udall's work is behind the scenes dealing with the Senate Intelligence Committee -- often in opposition to the policies of the Obama Administration regarding NSA surveillance abuses, the seemingly endless war in Af-Pak, overuse of drones, etc. You'd think that'd buy him a tad more tolerance from the GOP. Sure, the Cheney wing of the GOP (war today, war tomorrow, war forever) won't bite but the Rand Paul faction of libertarians (supposedly a key Colorado Republican constituency) seems (as they do so often) true believers in the "principles" right up to the point that it requires them to favor a Democrat over a Republican.

Unfortunately for Udall his best work is something he can't talk about. (Unfortunately for Gardner, his best work is his worst work - and people have already started talking about it.)

Sid wrote:Gardner is not anything near an extremist, he is nowhere near as far to the right as Udall is to the left.

Perhaps you should examine your own position on the right/left scale to understand why you consider him that way. After all, the Equator looks far to the north to someone in Australia, doesn't it?

If his previous positions were not extreme for Coloradans then why is he running away from them now that he has to appeal to more than just his house district?

Samples of his extreme positions:

Followed Ted Cruz to shut down the government and waste $24 billion.Co-sponsored Akin's bill that would redefine rape.Supported the personhood amendment and tried to pass it nationally Supported Ryan's budget which would have slashed education funding, privatized medicare and gut social security while giving the rich an average tax cut of $125,000Opposed overturning don't ask don't tell.

Here we are 7 months away from the Nov election and 2+ and years from the Presidential but already the rhetoric is in full swing. Absolutely nothing of worth will be accomplished until after the election, if then. Would it not be better and more efficient if political campaigns were limited to 2 months prior to an election--Less money spent; less overkill with stupid commercials; and less pandering and fairy tale telling to the populace?

Sid wrote:Gardner is not anything near an extremist, he is nowhere near as far to the right as Udall is to the left.

Perhaps you should examine your own position on the right/left scale to understand why you consider him that way. After all, the Equator looks far to the north to someone in Australia, doesn't it?

If his previous positions were not extreme for Coloradans then why is he running away from them now that he has to appeal to more than just his house district?

Samples of his extreme positions:

Followed Ted Cruz to shut down the government and waste $24 billion.Co-sponsored Akin's bill that would redefine rape.Supported the personhood amendment and tried to pass it nationally Supported Ryan's budget which would have slashed education funding, privatized medicare and gut social security while giving the rich an average tax cut of $125,000Opposed overturning don't ask don't tell.

These are all things most Coloradans would not support.

If his previous positions were extreme for Colorado, why did Colorado elect him?

Again, examine exactly where it is that your are coming from.

"The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." (Barack Obama August 21, 2010)

jgd777 wrote:Based on the history of the Quinnipiac polls, yesterday polls shows me Hick is in a dead heat with many of the contenders for governor and Gardner is ahead by 4-5 points. Typically if you take the Quinnipiac poll numbers and add 5 points to the side of the conservatives and you will have a more accurate picture of reality.

You're dreaming. In 2010 quinnipiac was named the most accurate polling firm with an average error of only 2%.